Canada teams up with suspicious USA military

[Karlin]

As Canada signs up for another NATO committment with the USA, we might want to take a step back and look at who we are dealing with.

#1 - Torture is still widespread in US custody
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/050306Z.shtml

#2 - the remaining questions over 9-11:
For one, are they ready yet? Can we depend on the airforce's ability to scramble fighter jets in the case of another attack on north america?
What I refer to is the fact that 20+ minutes passed after the first passenger plane hit WTC towers, and there was no response from the airforce - they had plenty of time to get fighterjets in the air and stop that second plane from hitting the towers.

So, simple question - Are they ready yet?

#3 - Iran situation - don't go there Canada!!!
http://www.straightgoods.ca/ViewFeature6.cfm?REF=272


But we are snuggling up with the USA military now that PM Harper is leading the house. Here is a post on that meeting:
The NATO/Norad agreement was signed onto yesterday.
" USA/ CANADA sign military agreements in secret " -
http://tinyurl.com/o5du2

All in all, I think Canada should step back from further integration with USA military. There is some people saying they want to achive FULL INTEGRATION of Canada's and the USA forces... which would surely be the end of Canada's soveriegnty over our own nation.

 

[FiveParadox]

Re: Canada—United States Integration

I have noticed, during the few months in which the Right Honourable Stephen Harper, P.C., M.P., the Member for Calgary Southwest and the Prime Minister of Canada has been the head of government in Canada, Canada has made significant steps toward further integration with the United States of America in terms of our co-ordination of the Canadian Forces, and our own defence. I would wonder if these recent agreements, and the notions of more such agreements in the future, compromise the ability of our own Department of Defence to protect our sovereignty.

To be quite clear, I am not anti-American — I do, however, recognize that the needs of the United States and the needs of Canada are unique and that, while we sometimes share common interests in terms of our defence initiatives, it should be noted that no two nations can have synchronized defence initiatives on an indefinite basis. It is quite common knowledge that persons detained at Guantanamo Bay have, at times, been reported to have been tortured, or treated in ways which would not conform to the expectations of the world community. Only a handful of persons at Guantanamo Bay have been charged with anything, and the rest are being held indefinitely without cause.

Canada should ensure that whatever courses of action we choose to take in the future are in the best interests of Canada and its own people, and that, with respect to our loved Southern neighbours, that the needs of other nations come second to the needs of our own. This doesn't mean that we shouldn't co-operate and co-ordinate with the United States — because we should, of course! However, we should do so where the United States is acting within a lawful framework, and where the interests of Canada are protected.

 

[darkbeaver]

RE: Canada teams up with

There is no political solution to the question of deep integration with the USA, remember "you're with us or against us" about that they are deadly serious. With the quisling Harper government we can expect, full deep and permanent integration with the pricks in Washington which has become our de-facto capital.
The liberals started the deep integration ball rolling more than a year ago, Harper just gets to sign the paper which spells the end of a free Canada, the deal has been engineered by corporate pigs from the begining. G W Bush is now our master and Harper is his boot licking little dog. There must be a revolution of the left accross North America before the corporatists destroy the planet.

 

[I think not]

You have no time to "revolt" you all are too busy bitching behind a monitor.

 

[Mogz]

There is nothing wrong with military integration. Working closely with another nation does not mean you become that nation and/or adopt their stances/views/traits/abilities. It makes doing your job with them that much easier, and it's a brilliant method from a military stand point.

Canada should ensure that whatever courses of action we choose to take in the future are in the best interests of Canada and its own people, and that, with respect to our loved Southern neighbours, that the needs of other nations come second to the needs of our own.

That's exactly where our Government is going. Flaws in our force projection capabilites have been highlighted since the early 90's, and anyone who even remotely understands the present day makeup and capabilites of the Canadian Forces, knows that if a major event (war, natural disaster) were to strike Canada, we'd require huge amounts of aid from the U.S. Take for example our Land Force projection capabilites, they're pitifully small when compared to other nations we're in line with (U.S., U.K., France, Germany, Italy):

1. We have no concrete Divisional capability, and as such our Brigades are independent of a parent chain of command as isn't the case in the above nations I listed. While this is good from a mobility stand point, it is a nightmare from an administrative and/or command stance. Assume for a moment that a massive natural disaster strikes Atlantic Canada, i.e. a hurricane such as Katrina. The nearest Brigades to the affected region would be:

36 Brigade
37 Brigade

Each of these is utterly decentralized, and as such it would take hours, if not days, to draw the respective units (i.e. infantry, armour, engineer etc) together to head to the disaster area. In the case of our neighbours to the south, they have several DIVISIONS on the Atlantic Seaboard, especially the 10th Mountain at Fort Drum New York. Given the nature of the U.S. Command Structure, it'd be far easier for a Brigade or two from Fort Drum to gear up, drive, and arrive at the disaster than 36 and 37 Brigades in Canada. That's just one example.

2. Heavy lift aircraft. Canada has none. We lost that capability in the 80's and the Government has never considered it a problem until now. Take the above mentioned scenario. If a disaster strikes the Maritimes, supplies will be needed in the area, especially if roads, water pumping stations, and power plants are knocked out. While Canada does fly CC-130 Hercules and CC-150 Polaris aircraft, there are two problems with these. The first being that most of these are committed to Operation Archer, the mission in Afghanistan. The second is their relatively small payloads. Why would we do 20 trips with a CC-130, when we could do 4 with a CC-17 Globemaster of the U.S. Air Force.

3. Manpower. The Canadian Forces is small when compared to other militarys World wide. Compare our 60,000 Reg Force with the 1.8 MILLION on active duty with the U.S. Military. Just a sidebar, there are more police officers in the City of New York than there are soldiers in the Canadian Army, a sombering thought. That all said, manpower plays a big factor in defending and/or attending to the needs of a nation the size of Canada. Even if you muster every reservists in Canada, our total Land Force capability (as of the fall 2005) is just short of 50,000. That may seem like a lot, but it really isn't. To put that in perspective, in World War II, over 60,000 Canadians were killed. In the event of a major event in Canada, 50,000 men and women would be but a drop in the bucket, especially when you consider that some of those numbers are trades that (for lack of a better term) would be useless to atend to a disaster, such as clerks, vehicle techs, mat techs, etc. The harsh reality is that the core people you'd need (Medics, Doctors, Nurses, Signallers, MPs, Engineers, Hydro Techs), are far and few between. The U.S. Military has an abundance of soldiers, especially in their National Guard Divisions. They could easily patch our significant holes in terms of skilled manpower.

4. Lastly, the freedom of access idea. For years Canadians and Americans have trained on eachothers soil. Recently the idea has been floated to allow each nation free access in terms of military manpower, albeit in times of emergency. This is a great idea when you think of it like this; if a disaster hits the Maritimes, would you rather wait for 36 and 37 Brigade to muster a response, and at the same time have troops from Fort Drum New York sitting at the border waiting for approval to enter Canada? Or would you prefer that whilst 36 and 37 Brigades are muster, the boys from 10th Mountain are rolling across the border towards the disaster area? Kind of a no brainer folks.

That's just a little taste of why working closely with the U.S. is in our interests. I do not think we should utterly whore ourselves out to America, however I, being a realist, understand why being intertwined with them is a GOOD thing.